"The second question in the order setting up the overturning of Humphrey's Executor has received less attention than the upcoming execution of the Executor precedent, but it seems to me to be at least as significant. Does it signal the (potential? or is that too starry-eyed?) death, at least in practice, of the Pendleton Act and the professional federal civil service? If courts cannot reinstate a public servant who is fired illegally, then aren't we simply back to the spoils system, but not openly?"
"Arturo is referring to a question that the Supreme Court teed up that asks "whether a federal court may prevent a person's removal from public office either through relief at equity or at law." That is in the case in which the Federal Trade Commission's Rebecca Slaughter challenged Donald Trump's illegal removal of her. It's a really important question because if courts cannot reinstate public officials who are illegally fired, then the entire federal civil service system falls apart"
The Supreme Court will decide whether federal courts may prevent removal of public officials through legal or equitable relief. The question arises from a case in which an FTC commissioner challenged a president's removal decision. If courts cannot reinstate officials removed illegally, statutory and constitutional protections for the federal civil service would lose practical force. The absence of effective reinstatement remedies would allow partisan firings despite legal safeguards. Such an outcome would undercut the Pendleton Act's merit-based framework and could convert federal employment into a de facto spoils system by removing meaningful enforcement of tenure protections.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]